119-hr3213

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3213 Introduced in House

    (IH) ]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
 1st Session
 H. R. 3213

To protect State and Federal courts' primary and inherent authority to 
 regulate and oversee the legal profession by prohibiting Federal 
 agencies from regulating licensed attorneys and law firms engaged in 
 litigation activities, prohibiting opposing parties in legal actions 
 from bringing private rights of action against such attorneys and law 
 firms for their litigation activities, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

 May 6, 2025

Mr. Fitzgerald introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on 
 Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
 Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
 within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

 A BILL

To protect State and Federal courts' primary and inherent authority to 
 regulate and oversee the legal profession by prohibiting Federal 
 agencies from regulating licensed attorneys and law firms engaged in 
 litigation activities, prohibiting opposing parties in legal actions 
 from bringing private rights of action against such attorneys and law 
 firms for their litigation activities, and for other purposes.

 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

 This Act may be cited as the ``Restoring Court Authority Over 
Litigation Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; SENSE OF CONGRESS.

    (a) In General.--Congress finds the following:

    (1) For many decades, attorneys engaged in the practice of 
 law have been regulated and disciplined primarily by the 
 highest court of the State in which the attorney is licensed or 
 admitted to practice, attorney disciplinary agencies overseen 
 by those courts, and other State and Federal courts of 
 competent jurisdiction pursuant to the applicable statutes, 
 rules of civil procedure, and rules of professional conduct and 
 disciplinary procedure duly adopted in those jurisdictions, and 
 not by Congress, Federal agencies, or private litigants.

    (2) State supreme courts have promulgated and enforced 
 extensive and effective regulations governing all aspects of 
 the practice of law, including admission requirements, strict 
 attorney rules of professional conduct, disciplinary rules, and 
 litigation procedural rules. In addition, Federal courts have 
 adopted local rules governing the conduct of attorneys 
 appearing before them. As a result, State and Federal courts 
 have extensive authority and tools to address attorney 
 misconduct that occurs during the course of litigation before 
 them, including monetary sanctions, striking offending 
 pleadings or other papers, or referring the matter to 
 disciplinary authorities, which could lead to a reprimand, 
 censure, license suspension, disbarment, or other available 
 disciplinary sanctions.

    (3) Consistent with the longstanding principle of judicial 
 regulation and oversight of attorneys and the legal profession, 
 numerous Federal agencies have included broad practice of law 
 exclusions in major rules, including the Federal Trade 
 Commission's ``Mortgage Assistance Relief Services'' Rule 
 issued in November 2010 and the Department of Housing and Urban 
 Development's ``Secure and Fair Enforcement for Mortgage 
 Licensing Act'' Rule issued in June 2011.

    (4) Also consistent with the principle of judicial 
 regulation of attorneys and the legal profession, Congress has 
 generally declined to enact legislation regulating the practice 
 of law, including litigation activities of attorneys.

    (5) Congress has also incorporated broad practice of law 
 exclusions into certain Federal statutes. For example, 

section 1027

    (e) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 
 excludes most attorneys engaged in the practice of law from the 
 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's regulatory and 
 enforcement authority, while the Fair Debt Collection Practices 
 Act of 1977 originally contained a complete exemption for 
 attorneys engaged in the practice of law.

    (6) Although Congress removed the complete attorney 
 exemption from the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in 1986 
 based in part on its belief that the revised Act would only 
 apply to attorneys' non-litigation collection activities and 
 that State courts would continue to regulate attorneys' 
 litigation activities, the United States Supreme Court held in 
 Heintz v. Jenkins, 514 U.S. 291

    (1995) , that attorneys could be 
 subject to the Act even when they are engaged in litigation 
 activities. As a result, many attorneys now are routinely sued 
 for litigation activities in State court that are alleged to be 
 technical violations of the Act, even when consumers suffer no 
 harm.

    (7) In each of its annual reports to Congress on the Fair 
 Debt Collection Practices Act from 1998 through 2006, the 
 Federal Trade Commission formally recommended that Congress 
 reexamine and amend the definition of ``debt collector'' in the 
 Act to exempt ``attorneys who pursue debtors solely through 
 litigation (or similar `legal' practices).''

    (8) In recent years, the Consumer Financial Protection 
 Bureau has also aggressively sought to regulate attorneys' 
 collection activities, including their litigation activities, 
 despite the broad practice of law exclusion in 

section 1027

    (e) of the Consumer Financial Protection Act. The Bureau's 
 aggressive actions could also lead to other Federal agencies 
 adopting rules or practices regulating attorneys' litigation 
 activities in other types of court cases.

    (9) These developments have undermined State and Federal 
 courts' primary and inherent authority to regulate and oversee 
 attorneys engaged in the practice of law by creating multiple 
 conflicting sets of rules and standards for attorneys, 
 resulting in unfair lawsuits against attorneys pursuing valid 
 legal claims for clients in court, increased attorney 
 malpractice insurance rates, difficulty in obtaining legal 
 representation, and reduced access to justice.

    (10) On January 26, 2011, the Conference of Chief Justices 
 adopted Resolution 1 (``In Support of Preserving Traditional 
 State Court Regulation of Lawyers and Opposing Expanded Federal 
 Agency Regulation of Lawyers and the Practice of Law''), 
 affirming that primary regulation and oversight of attorneys 
 and the legal profession should continue to be vested in the 
 State courts, not Federal agencies or Congress, and that the 
 courts are in the best position to fulfill that important 
 function. The Resolution also expressed support for Congress 
 and Federal agencies' decisions to include broad practice of 
 law exclusions in certain Federal statutes and agency rules, 
 and opposition to Federal legislation or rules intended to 
 establish or expand the Federal regulatory jurisdiction of 
 attorneys engaged in the practice of law.

    (11) While the activities constituting the practice of law 
 are determined by the State in which an attorney is licensed or 
 admitted to practice, litigation activities in connection with 
 a legal action in State or Federal court are considered to be 
 part of the practice of law in every State.

    (12) To protect and restore State and Federal courts' 
 primary and inherent authority to regulate and oversee 
 attorneys and the legal profession, Federal legislation is 
 needed to clarify that--
        (A) attorneys engaged in litigation should be 
 regulated and disciplined exclusively by State supreme 
 courts, their attorney disciplinary agencies, and other 
 State and Federal courts of competent jurisdiction;
        (B) Federal agencies shall have no regulatory 
 authority over litigation activities of attorneys; and
            (C) no party in a legal action shall have a Federal 
 private right of action against the opposing attorney 
 for the attorney's litigation activities.

    (13) On February 5, 2020, the Conference of Chief Justices 
 also adopted a second Resolution 1, entitled ``In Support of 
 Preserving the Courts' Authority to Regulate and Oversee 
 Lawyers Engaged in Litigation and Opposing Federal Agency 
 Regulation of Lawyers' Litigation Activities'', which expressed 
 support for Federal legislation that would implement the three 
 proposed reforms described in paragraph

    (12) .

    (14) On April 12, 2023, the Consumer Financial Protection 
 Bureau published its Statement of Policy Regarding Prohibition 
 on Abusive Acts or Practices that explains its interpretation 
 of those prohibitions contained in the Consumer Financial 
 Protection Act of 2010 and the actions that providers of 
 consumer financial products or services, including attorneys 
 engaged in debt collection, must take or avoid in order to 
 comply with the Act. However, by requiring attorneys 
 representing creditors in debt collection litigation to act in 
 the interests of consumers instead of the interests of their 
 own clients, and by requiring attorneys to take other steps 
 inconsistent with their ethical duties, the Consumer Financial 
 Protection Bureau Statement of Policy directly conflicts with 
 the courts' well-established attorney rules of professional 
 conduct, attorney disciplinary rules, and litigation procedural 
 rules, thus further undermining the courts' primary and 
 inherent authority to regulate and oversee attorneys engaged in 
 the practice of law.

    (b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that attorneys 
engaged in litigation activities should be regulated and disciplined 
exclusively by the courts and other authorities of the State in which 
the attorney is licensed or admitted to practice, attorney disciplinary 
agencies overseen by those courts, and other State and Federal courts 
of competent jurisdiction pursuant to the applicable statutes, rules of 
civil procedure, and rules of professional conduct and disciplinary 
procedure duly adopted in those jurisdictions.

SEC. 3. COURT AUTHORITY OVER ATTORNEYS ENGAGED IN LITIGATION 
 ACTIVITIES.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 99 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting after 

section 1631 the following:
``

Sec. 1632. Preservation of State and Federal courts' primary and 
 inherent authority to regulate and oversee attorneys 
 engaged in litigation activities
 ``

    (a) 

=== Definitions. ===
-In this section:
 ``

    (1) Federal agency.--The term `Federal agency' means an 
 agency as defined in 

section 551

    (1) of title 5.
 ``

    (2) Litigation activities.--The term `litigation 
 activities' means any actions by a licensed attorney or a law 
 firm in connection with a legal action in a court of law on 
 behalf of a client, including--
 ``
        (A) serving, filing, or conveying formal legal 
 pleadings, discovery requests, or other documents 
 pursuant to the applicable statute or rules of civil 
 procedure;
 ``
        (B) communicating in, or at the direction of, a 
 court of law (including in depositions or settlement 
 conferences) or in the enforcement of a judgment; and
 ``
            (C) any other activities engaged in as part of 
 the practice of law, under the laws of a State in which 
 the attorney is licensed or admitted to practice, that 
 relate to the legal action.
 ``

    (3) State.--The term `State' means the 50 States, the 
 District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 
 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, 
 Guam, and the United States Virgin Islands.
 ``

    (b) Limitation on Federal Agency Authority.--Notwithstanding any 
other provision of law, a Federal agency does not have any supervisory, 
enforcement, or regulatory authority over litigation activities of 
attorneys or law firms.
 ``
            (c) No Private Right of Action.--Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, a person may not bring a civil action in a court of 
the United States seeking relief for harm arising out of alleged 
misconduct related to the litigation activities of an opposing attorney 
or law firm.''.

    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 99 of 
title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item 
related to 

section 1631 the following:

``1632. Preservation of State and Federal courts' primary and inherent 
 authority to regulate and oversee attorneys 
 engaged in litigation activities.''.

SEC. 4. CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.

    (a) Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.--

Section 803

    (6) of the Fair 
Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 1692a

    (6) ) is amended--

    (1) by redesignating subparagraph
        (F) as subparagraph
        (G) ; 
 and

    (2) by inserting after subparagraph
        (E) the following:
 ``
        (F) any licensed attorney or any law firm, to the 
 extent that such attorney or firm is engaged in 
 litigation activities (as such term is defined in 
 

section 1632 of title 28, United States Code) to 
 collect a debt on behalf of a client; and''.

    (b) Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010.--

Section 1027

    (e) of 
the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. 5517

    (e) ) is 
amended--

    (1) by redesignating paragraph

    (3) as paragraph

    (4) ; and

    (2) by inserting after paragraph

    (2) the following:
 ``

    (3) Rule of construction limitation with respect to debt 
 collection.--Paragraph

    (2) shall not apply to a licensed 
 attorney engaging in litigation activities to collect a debt on 
 behalf of a client if the attorney is excluded from the term 
 `debt collector' under 

section 803 of the Fair Debt Collection 
 Practices Act by reason of 

section 803

    (6)
        (F) of such Act.''.
 <all>